Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

(About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

    First of all, thanks so much to everybody who has taken part in the "stickied" survey so far (there may be a couple more of them in the next couple of weeks...).

    Now let me attempt to explain what this is about, and see if I can spark some discussion/input from you guys.

    Basically, I'm trying to design a prototype of something that would take the place of (or improve upon) the idea of "game threads" and live chat during games.

    a couple of seasons ago, after I got my new laptop, I frequently would set up shop in the living room and post to the chats/game threads while watching the games.

    It was fun for a while, but after a couple of months the novelty wore off, mainly for two reasons:

    1) - I realized that, since I was constantly trying to both watch the TV AND look at a computer screen, that I was missing out on key plays in the game.

    2) - The style of communication seemed awkward somehow. Conversation in the message board threads seemed very restricted, and there was a lways a time delay (i.e. someone commenting on a great play wouldn't get their post online until 30 seconds later or so, when the next play was already in full swing). Conversation in the chat room, on the other hand, was chaotic at best, and hard to follow - it was often hard to see who was speaking to whom, and following a full conversation took a lot of concentration and distracted from the game.

    --------
    So, to make a long story short, I don't post in game threads/chat anymore. However, there definitely is something cool about being able to communicate with other fans remotely while you're watching (or listening to) the game. In a way, it helps replace a little bit of what's lost by not being at the stadium - having spontaneous interaction with other fans. Smack talk, yelling, cheering, "oohs" and "aahs," etc. You just don't get that experience sitting at home (unless you're at a Superbowl party or something).


    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    So our "problem space" is, essentially, that we need a system that:

    1) - allows fans to communicate more spontaneously (everybody can "cheer" at once for example, instead of looking at 15 lines of YES! in a chat room)
    2) (and this is the tricky part) - doesn't distract from the game (i.e., you don't have to constantly look back and forth between two different screens during a live game in order to talk to people).
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    I have some pretty solid ideas about how I'm going to go about designing/testing this, and how it might work, but before I get into that, I'd like to know what you guys think.

    How would you solve this problem? Is this a problem that needs to be solved at all? Would you use such a thing? And what would it look like/how would it work?

    Any and all comments/discussion would be greatly appreciated. Again, thanks for all the help, guys!

  • #2
    Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

    It'd be a technological nightmare (I think), but if you had one page, where a quarter (or more?) of the screen was a video feed of the game, and the rest was an area to communicate, and another with stats/info about the game, it could be all right if designed very well. Since broadcasting the game like that doesn't seem in the cards (yet, MLB gives me optimism), perhaps people with PC-DVRs could let the feed actually embed itself into the webpage?

    If something like that were possible, and there was a way to somehow synchronize it among all visitors, you would have a more harmonic system.

    But I think that's pure tech fantasy at this point. Although if you take out the video, and subsitute it with audio of some kind (which I believe we've discussed various possibilities there), you may be on to something.

    Of course, that still has the issue of synchronizing everything up.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

      This sounds like an interesting project, and one I can relate to. I've found it difficult to participate in game threads, because I don't enjoy clicking the refresh button constantly while play is taking place. On the other hand, the game chat can seem chaotic at times and difficult to interpret.

      My feeling, with this board in particular, is there has to be a way of merging both game chat and game threads together. The game threads are full of play-by-play updates, which however, may make more sense in a real-time setting. There are always people in one or the other, but it would nice to have everyone in the same place.

      I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with, because I would definitely make use of it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

        I've flirted with adding a chat that would actually be a PART of the forum, to see if it allowed options to make something that would bring the look/features of the game thread to a chat, but so far nothing's impressed me and I haven't looked thoroughly in a while.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

          OK I started this long thing including historic overview but ofcourse, someone interrupted me, phones are your friend, and now I am restarting

          First a wee bit technical

          There are at this moment two main streams in "chat" being "irc" and "html-based"
          The latter one uses Java as engine in most cases, wich allows for "nicer" graphics, embedding etc. though some applets are irc based (like the one we use) and some are fully java based.

          The "game-thread" is simple html/php, refresh is your "friend" (*not mine, as every refresh is a re-connect to the servers and reloading the page is bandwidth usage) this type of "chat" is very related to the latter days, and is exactly where the broadband comes in and where forums have left the good ol bbs's behind them.

          This latest form is only possible on broadband, it is a killer of any dial-up connection, even with all the virtual gadgets off, the size of the pages reloading is simply to much to keep doing on a dial-up.

          Video transmission via the internet (even my servers) is very possible, the requirements are relatively "easy" to setup, and depending on the participation it might even be possible to do this sooner or later, technically it is certainly possible, but the bandwidth usage on my side would be growing exponentially with the participants, so certains caveats will have to be made to begin with, even leaving all legal issues aside.

          Inserting a chat screen in a display (full page or let's say top 80% of the screen) is relatively easy once again, however our brain and physical motorical incompetency is a large stop sign on that.

          Consider reading subtitles, this is for those who are trained in it, i.e. grew up with it easy and in most cases subconscious, but, for those not trained in it the subtitles are very distracting, so much that in countries like the UK, France, Germany and the USA the use of subtitles immediately leads to lower viewer numbers and lower appreciation. In all reality the numbers are far lower then the actual numbers reflected in viewing, because those numbers do not account for the numbers of native speakers of the language that is subtitled.

          Now add to that the fact one has to answer at times to get interaction, debate or whatever you want to call it, and base that on the fact that most of the internet users are not trained "typist" who can type blindly, add to that the fact that even IF you can do that, you still need to read back what you are typing in order to prevent total nonsense or gibberish to appear on the screen (and we all know it still appears despite all those precautions)

          This all takes away from our ability to do both things at the same time, mainly because our eye/brain coordination is not trained to do both at the same time with equal results as to when we would do each seperately.

          That leaves only "sound" interaction, it is easy to talk while watching, this improves with the equaly downgrading of the quality of the commentating or the pure lack of it.

          That leaves in my unstudied opinion two options:

          1. video with open "conferencing" channels (sound)

          2. sound with open "chat" channels.

          the latter equals the first with the exception of the experience.

          Both are technically possible with our current setup, whether they are viable legally and financially are different questions. Both of which I am willing to participate in or investigate and instignate.

          It does leave open however the fact that other solutions outside of my frame of thinking are possible.
          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

            Interesting that you guys came to pretty much the same conclusions I did...

            Hicks, it actually is very do-able (not especially easy, but do-able) to create the type of application you're talking about. Essentially you would write a DVR software package, embed a video stream, and then have avatars or whatever doing stuff off-screen.

            I see two problems with this approach, however. The first is cost. You'd really need a fast computer with a nice TV card to pull that off, which most people still either can't afford or set up (of course, you could build a dedicated box like a tiVo, but that's beyond the scope of my project). Te second problem is that the more information you put on the screen, the harder it will be to pay attention to the game itself.

            So at this point I'm definitely leaning towards what able is talking about, which is an audio-based solution.

            In fact, I'm thinking that we should try to do a quick-and dirty test sometime soon. Get ten volunteers or so to buy some PC headsets (anywhere from 15 bucks for wired to 30+ for wireless), then register everybody on an online service such as yahoo messenger with voice, and let the mayhem begin!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

              Ah - brings me back to the Skype stuff. Which still is, in my opinion, one of the best programs out there for conference stuff.

              I'd be willing to help out in any way possible.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                Interesting idea.

                I would love it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                  Rabid, in short: the video solution with a "sound" solution can be done short term (i.e. within a few weeks, perhaps even less) in actual facts the same server that hosts this site, as well as another server in my rack both have full setups to broadcast video with a single input stream over adsl.

                  Combine that with a high speed "talking" solution, (forget skype, it is now a pay solution) and you have the "ultimate" for this moment in time.

                  There are several open source conference call options, I will read some up and post a list later this week, once I can find some time.

                  Please email me rabid, if interested, so we can discuss details if you are so inclined

                  (abel@able-towers.com)
                  So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                  If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                  Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                    Skype is still free for me... ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                      Originally posted by Hicks
                      Skype is still free for me... ?
                      Same here.

                      (Side note: I had to reinstall everything and lost your username - want to hook me up with that again?)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                        new accounts do not seem to be free anymore, and they have clear plans to charge for the usage, the newsoftware can only be gotten after paying
                        Which leaves the still valid point that a maximum of 4 ppl can be plugged in for conferencing, which limits participation somewhat
                        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                          Originally posted by Hicks
                          It'd be a technological nightmare (I think), but if you had one page, where a quarter (or more?) of the screen was a video feed of the game, and the rest was an area to communicate, and another with stats/info about the game, it could be all right if designed very well. Since broadcasting the game like that doesn't seem in the cards (yet, MLB gives me optimism), perhaps people with PC-DVRs could let the feed actually embed itself into the webpage?

                          If something like that were possible, and there was a way to somehow synchronize it among all visitors, you would have a more harmonic system.

                          But I think that's pure tech fantasy at this point. Although if you take out the video, and subsitute it with audio of some kind (which I believe we've discussed various possibilities there), you may be on to something.

                          Of course, that still has the issue of synchronizing everything up.
                          That is exactly what I thought of, Hicks. It would take a lot of trial and error to get it to work but if it did the dividends would be exponential!

                          The downside is that the NBA would no doubt shut it down if they found out about it. However, if someone was able to create such a system they could litterally make millions with it. The key would be to patent it before putting it to live use. That way when the NBA comes a calling you can offer to sell the technology to them.

                          If they NBA isn't game to pony up the cash, go to the press with the product. I'm sure some forward thinking exec at one of the major television studios or another professional sports organization will be interested.




                          BTW, if this plan works, I'll expect a mere 5% idea fee to be sent my way.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: (About the Survey) building a better in-game chat system

                            I'm going to go the audio route. In fact, I think I've got the perfect solution...

                            gonna set up a TeamSpeak server.

                            http://www.goteamspeak.com/

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X